The Effect of Different Planning Conditions versus Explicit Grammar Instruction on Young EFL Learners’ Oral Production of a Picture Promoted Task and Grammar Gain

Karim Sadeghi; Azadeh Hamidi

doi:10.4995/rlyla.2024.20803

Authors

Karim Sadeghi Dhofar University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1426-9997
Azadeh Hamidi Urmia University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4995/rlyla.2024.20803

Keywords:

EFL learners, grammatical knowledge, oral production, planning condition, ask design

Abstract

This study examined the effects of three task conditions on young EFL learners’ oral performance of a picture prompted task and their grammatical knowledge gain. To this end, 34 EFL learners were randomly assigned into three experimental groups, namely online planning, pre-planning, and explicit instruction, and one control group. Pictures were employed as prompts to implement the tasks in all groups. A Grammatical Judgment Test was used to compare students’ knowledge of simple present passive structure before and after the treatment. Learners’ oral task performance was measured in terms of Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency (CAF). The findings demonstrated significant differences among groups as for CAF measures. However, no significant differences were spotted in GJT posttest scores. The paper calls for the incorporation of diverse prompt-based planning conditions in task-oriented teaching practices in order to target learners' higher levels of oral competence.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Akakura, M. (2011). Evaluating the effectiveness of explicit instruction on implicit and explicit L2 knowledge. Language Teaching Research, 16/1, 9-37. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168811423339

Anderson, J.R. (1995). Learning and memory: an integrated approach. New York: Wiley.

Bygate, M. (2001). Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral language. In. Bygate, M. Skehan, P., &. M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks, second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 23-48). Harlow: Longman.

Crookes, G. (1989). Planning and interlanguage variation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11, 367-383. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100008391

DeKeyser, R.M. (1998). Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practicing second language grammar. In C. Doughty, & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom language acquisition (pp. 42-63). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dewey, J. (Ed.). (1913, 1975). Interest and effort in education. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press, Arcturus Books.

Dickens, P., & Woods, E. (1988). Some criteria for the development of communicative grammar tasks. TESOL Quarterly, 22/3, 623-646. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587260

Duff, P. (1986). Another look at interlanguage talk: Taking task to task. In R. Day (Ed.), Talking to learn. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House. Elder, C., & Iwashita, N. (2005). Planning for test performance. Does it make a difference? In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in second language learning (pp. 219-238). Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11.14eld

Ellis, R. (1987). Interlanguage variability in narrative discourse: Style in the use of the past tense. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 9, 12-20. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100006483

Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R. (2005). Planning and task-based performance: Theory and research. In: R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in second language (pp. 3-34). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11

Ellis, R. (2008). Explicit knowledge and second language learning and pedagogy. In J. Cenoz & N.H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education: Knowledge about language (pp. 143-153). New York: Springer.

Ellis, R. (2009). Task-based language teaching: Sorting out the misunderstandings. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 19, 221-246. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2009.00231.x

Ellis, R., & Barkhuizen, G. (2005). Analysing learner language. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R., Li, S., & Zhu, Y. (2018). The effects of pre-task explicit instruction on the performance of a focused task. System, 80, 38-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.10.004

Ellis, R., & Shintani, N. (2014). Exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisition research. New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203796580

Ellis, R., & Yuan, F. (2004). The effects of planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in second language narrative writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263104026130

Foster, P. (1996). Doing the task better: How planning time influences students' performance. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching (pp. 126-135). England: Heinemann.

Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 299-323. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100015047

Freeman, L. (2012). Techniques and Principals of Language Teaching.

Hulstijn, J., & Hulstijn, W. (1984). Grammatical errors as a function of processing constraints and explicit knowledge. Language Learning34/1, 23-43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1984.tb00994.x

Iwashita N., C. Elder, & T. McNamara. (2001). Can we predict task difficulty in an oral proficiency test? Exploring the potential of an information-processing approach to task design. Language Learning 51/3, 401-436. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00160

Kawauchi, C. (2005). The effects of strategic planning on the oral narratives of learners with low and high intermediate L2 proficiency. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in second language learning (pp. 143-164). Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11.09kaw

Khoram, A., & Zhang, Z. (Reviewing editor) (2019). The impact of task type and pre-task planning condition on the accuracy of intermediate EFL learners' oral performance, Cogent Education, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2019.1675466

Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.

Kuiken, V., & Vedder, I. (2012). Syntactic complexity, lexical variation and accuracy as a function of task complexity and proficiency level in L2 writing and speaking. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 143-169). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.32.07kui

Long, M. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In K. de Bot, R. Ginsberg, & C. Kramsch (Eds.), foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective (pp. 39-52). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.2.07lon

Macaro, E. & Masterman, L. (2006). Does intensive explicit grammar instruction make all the difference? Language Teaching Research, 10, 297-327. https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168806lr197oa

Marsden, R. (1999). Go for the 'a-ha!' factor in grammar learning. Deutsch: Lehren und Lernen19, 15-16.

Martoccio, A.M. (2012). The acquisition of differential object marking in L2 Spanish learners (Doctoral dissertation, Urbana, IL:University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign). Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1420355126.

Mehnert, U. (1998). The effects of different lengths of time for planning on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20, 83-108. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263198001041

Michel, M.C., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2012). Task complexity and interaction: (Combined) effects on task-based performance in Dutch as a second language. EUROSLA Yearbook, 12, 164- 190. https://doi.org/10.1075/eurosla.12.09mic

Mitchell, R. (2000). Anniversary article. Applied linguistics and evidence-based classroom practice: The case of foreign language grammar pedagogy. Applied Linguistics, 21, 281-303. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/21.3.281

Mochizuki, N., & Ortega, L. (2008). Balancing communication and grammar in beginning-level foreign language classrooms: A study of guided planning and relativization. Language Teaching Research, 12/1, 11-37.https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168807084492

Nasiri, M., & Atai, M. (2017). An Investigation into the Effects of Joint Planning on Complexity, Accuracy, and Fluency across Task Complexity. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 9/20, 49-74.

Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching.Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667336

Ortega, L. (1995). Planning and second language oral performance (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Hawai'i.

Ortega, L. (1999). Planning and focus on form in L2 oral performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 108-148. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263199001047

Pienemann, M. (1998). Language processing and second language development: Processability theory. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.15

Prabhu, N.S. (1987). Second language pedagogy. Oxford University Press.

Reinders H. (2008). The effects of implicit and explicit instructions on acquisition of two English grammatical structures. Korean Journal of Applied Linguistics, 24/1, 1-18.

Robinson, P. (1995). Task complexity and second language narrative discourse. Language Learning, 45/1, 99-140. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1995.tb00964.x

Robinson, P. (2001a). Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Robinson, P. (2001b). Task complexity, task difficulty and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22, 27-57. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.27

Robinson, P. (2005). Cognitive complexity and task Sequencing: Studies in a componential framework for second language task design. International review of applied linguistics in language teaching, 43, 1-32. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2005.43.1.1

Robinson, P. (Ed.). (2011). Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.2

Sadeghi, K., & Ghaderi, F. (2018) Pre-task planning and explicit instruction: Effects on CALF in an oral jigsaw task and gains in linguistic knowledge, Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 36/4, 365-378. https://doi.org/10.2989/16073614.2018.1548298

Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17/1, 38-62. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/17.1.38

Skehan P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1177/003368829802900209

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1997). Task type and task processing conditions as influences on foreign language performance. Language Teaching Research1, 185-211. https://doi.org/10.1177/136216889700100302

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1999). The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative Retellings. Language Learning, 49, 93-120. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00071

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2001) Cognition and tasks. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and Second Language Instruction (pp.183-205). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.009

Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (2005). Strategic and on-line planning: The effects of surprise information and task time on second language performance. In R. Ellis (Ed.), Planning and task performance in second language learning (pp. 193-216). Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11.12ske

Slimani-Rolls, A. (2005).Rethinking task-based language learning: What we can learn from the Learners. Language Teaching Research,9 /2, 195- 218. https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168805lr163oa

Tavakoli, P., Skehan, P. (2005). Strategic planning, task structure and performance testing. In Ellis, R. (Ed.), Planning and task performance in a second language (pp. 239-277). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.11.15tav

Van de Guchte, M., Rijlaarsdam, G., Braaksma, M., & Bimmel, R. (2017). Focus on language versus focus on content in the pretask: Effects of guided peer video model observations on task performance. Language Teaching Research, 23/3, 310-329. Retrieved from. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168817735543

VanPatten, B. (1990). Attending to form and content in the input. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12,287-301. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100009177

Wendel, J. (1997). Planning and second language narrative production (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Temple University Japan, Tokyo.

Wigglesworth, G. (1997). An investigation of planning time and proficiency level on oral test discourse. Language Testing, 14, 85-106. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229701400105

Wigglesworth G. (2001). Influences on performance in task based oral assessments. In Bygate M., P. Skehan and M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching, and testing, (pp. 186-209). Harlow, England: Longman.

Wright, M. (1999). Grammar in the languages classroom: findings from research. Language Learning Journal 19, 33-39. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571739985200071

Yuan, F., & Ellis, R. (2003). The effects of pretask planning and on-line planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in L2 monologic oral production. Applied Linguistics, 24, 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/24.1.1